This document is an appendix QA Framework: Specification Guidelines [QAF-SPEC]
. It provides a tabular checklist of all
checkpoints from the specification guidelines, sorted by their priorities. Please refer to QA Framework: Specification Guidelines [QAF-SPEC]
for the full statement and description of
the specification guidelines and checkpoints, as well as references to related
documents and full credits and acknowledgements of contributors to the
specification guidelines work.
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its
publication. Other documents may supersede this document. The latest status
of this document series is maintained at the W3C.
This document is derived from and is an appendix to QA Framework: Specification Guidelines [QAF-SPEC]
, which document is a W3C Working Draft
(WD), made available by the W3C
Quality Assurance (QA) Activity for discussion by W3C members and other
interested parties. For more information about the QA Activity, please see
the QA Activity statement. Please
see the "Status of this document"
section of the corresponding specification guidelines
[QAF-SPEC]
, for complete details about the status of the
specification guidelines version from which this is extracted and which it
accompanies.
Please send comments to www-qa@w3.org,
the publicly
archived list of the QA Interest
Group [QAIG]. Please note
that any mail sent to this list will be publicly archived
and available. Do not send information you wouldn't want to see distributed,
such as private data.
Publication of this document does not imply endorsement by the W3C, its
membership or its staff. This is a draft document and may be updated,
replaced, or made obsolete by other documents at any time. It is
inappropriate to use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to cite them
as other than "work in progress".
A list of current W3C Recommendations and other technical documents can be
found at http://www.w3.org/TR.
This checklist includes all checkpoints from the QA Framework: Specification Guidelines [QAF-SPEC]
presented in a
tabular format.
The checkpoints are presented by order of their priorities, which makes it an appropriate Implementation Conformance Statement for the guidelines.
The presentation is intended to be convenient for organizers and
evaluators of QA projects in W3C Working Groups, to facilitate assessing
specifications against the checkpoints. The table includes spaces for
scoring each checkpoint, "yes" (satisfied), "no" (not satisfied), "n/a" (not
applicable).
For a description of the meaning of the priorities in the following table,
please consult
the conformance
clause
and the priorities
definition section
of the specification guidelines ([QAF-SPEC], chapter 3 and
section 1.7)
.
To be A-conformant with the guidelines, the following Priority 1 checkpoints must be fulfilled:
| Nbr | Checkpoint | Yes | No | N/A |
|---|
Guideline 1. Define Scope. |
| 1.1 | Include the scope of the specification. | | | |
Guideline 2. Identify what needs to conform and
how. |
| 2.1 | Identify all classes of product. | | | |
| 2.2 | For each class of product, define
the conformance requirements. | | | |
Guideline 3. Specify conformance policy. |
| 3.4 | If special conformance terms are used, include a
definition in the specification. | | | |
| 3.5 | Justify any usage of a dimension of variability by
reference to usage scenarios and requirements | | | |
Guideline 4. Address the use of profiles to divide
the technology. |
| 4.1 | Indicate whether or not the use of
profiles is mandatory for conformance. | | | |
Guideline 5. Address the use of modules to divide the
technology. |
| 5.1 | If modules are chosen, indicate any
mandatory conditions or constraints on their usage. | | | |
Guideline 7. Identify the relation between deprecated features and
conformance. |
| 7.1 | Identify each deprecated feature. | | | |
| 7.2 | For each class of product, specify the
degree of support required for each deprecated feature and the conformance
consequences of the deprecation. | | | |
Guideline 8. Define discretionary items. |
| 8.1 | State the circumstances for when
discretionary items are allowed | | | |
| 8.2 | For implementation dependencies, address the
allowable differences between implementations | | | |
Guideline 9. Allow extensions or NOT! |
| 9.1 | Indicate if the specification is
extensible. | | | |
| 9.2 | If extensions are allowed, define their scope
and constraints. | | | |
| 9.3 | Prevent extensions from contradicting the
specification. | | | |
Guideline 10. Provide a conformance clause. |
| 10.1 | Include a conformance section. | | | |
Guideline 11. Specify how to make conformance
claims. |
| 11.1 | Identify and define all conformance
designations. | | | |
| 11.4 | Impose no restrictions about who can make a
claim or where claims can be published. | | | |
Guideline 13. Clearly identify conformance requirements. |
| 13.1 | Use conformance key words. | | | |
| 13.2 | Distinguish normative and informative
text. | | | |
| 13.3 | Use consistent terminology. | | | |
To be AA-conformant with the guidelines, the following Priority 2 checkpoints must be fulfilled (in addition to the above Priority 1 checkpoints):
| Nbr | Checkpoint | Yes | No | N/A |
|---|
Guideline 1. Define Scope. |
| 1.4 | Provide examples. | | | |
Guideline 3. Specify conformance policy. |
| 3.1 | Specify any universal requirements for minimum
functionality. | | | |
Guideline 4. Address the use of profiles to divide
the technology. |
| 4.2 | If profiles are chosen, define any minimal
requirements. | | | |
| 4.3 | If profiles are chosen, define their
relationships and interaction with other dimensions of variability. | | | |
| 4.4 | If profiles are chosen, address rules for
profiles. | | | |
Guideline 5. Address the use of modules to divide the
technology. |
| 5.2 | If modules are chosen, define their
relationships and interaction with other dimensions of variability. | | | |
Guideline 6. Address the use of functional levels to
divide the technology. |
| 6.1 | If levels are used, define their relationships
and interaction with other dimensions of variability. | | | |
Guideline 8. Define discretionary items. |
| 8.3 | Indicate any constraints on the number of
choices/options that can be implemented for discretionary choices | | | |
| 8.4 | Promote consistent handling of discretionary
choices. | | | |
Guideline 10. Provide a conformance clause. |
| 10.2 | Make normative
reference to specifications on which the current specification
depends | | | |
Guideline 13. Clearly identify conformance requirements. |
| 13.4 | Provide a
fast way to find conformance information | | | |
Guideline 14. Provide test assertions. |
| 14.1 | Provide test assertions | | | |
| 14.2 | Provide a mapping between the specification and the
test assertions list | | | |
To be AAA-conformant with the guidelines, the following Priority 3 checkpoints must be fulfilled (in addition to the above Priority 1 and Priority 2 checkpoints):
| Nbr | Checkpoint | Yes | No | N/A |
|---|
Guideline 1. Define Scope. |
| 1.3 | Provide Usage
Scenarios. | | | |
Guideline 2. Identify what needs to conform and
how. |
| 2.3 | Identify which of the categories of object
are specified in the document as a whole. | | | |
Guideline 7. Identify the relation between deprecated features and
conformance. |
| 7.4 | Include an explanation for the
deprecation. | | | |
| 7.5 | Include examples to illustrate how to avoid
using deprecated features. | | | |
Guideline 9. Allow extensions or NOT! |
| 9.4 | Define a uniform mechanism to create an extensionUse a standard mechanism to define the
extension. | | | |
| 9.5 | Require that extensions be published. | | | |
| 9.6 | Require that implementations provide interoperable alternatives to extensions | | | |
Guideline 11. Specify how to make conformance
claims. |
| 11.2 | Provide specific wording of the claim. | | | |
| 11.3 | Provide a conformance disclaimer. | | | |
Guideline 12. Publish an
Implementation Conformance Statement proforma. |
| 12.1 | Provide an Implementation Conformance Statement
proforma. | | | |
| 12.2 | Require the ICS be completed as
part of the conformance claim. | | | |
- QAF-SPEC
- QA Framework: Specification Guidelines, D. Hazaël-Massieux, L. Henderson, L. Rosenthal, D. Dimitriadis, K. Gavrylyuk, Eds., W3C Working Draft, January 2003, available at http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qaframe-spec.